SMT RENU SANGWAN,MAHAVIR COLONY ROHTAK vs. ITO WARD-5, ROHTAK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the NFAC for de novo adjudication, emphasizing that the assessee should be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The appeals arose from an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) concerning assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The NFAC had decided the issue ex parte without adjudicating on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC's ex parte decision without adjudicating on merits warrants a restoration of the appeal for fresh adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH
O R D E R
The appeals in & 2659/Del/2019 for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 arises out of the order of the ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] dated 21.03.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 14.12.2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by ITO, Ward- 5, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). Identical issues are involved in both these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. I have heard the Ld DR and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the ld NFAC, I find that the ld NFAC had decided the issue ex parte without adjudicating the issue on merits giving its independent finding. Hence, in the interest of justice and fairplay, I deem it fit and appropriate to restore these appeals to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious Page | 1 disposal of the appeals by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21/03/2025.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026